Mary Jo Foley, whom I respect very much, has unintentionally started World War III. The Apple enthusiasts are on a full force assault against Mary Jo and other Microsoft enthusiasts, armed with some of the most childlike, indecent, or down right foul insults I could possible imagine. And for what? What is it going to achieve? Why are we so hostile? And why are we divided in the first place? Questions I think some people need to ask themselves, and without criticizing anyone else first, I need to ask myself.

So the back-story is that Apple demonstrated a lot of “sort of new” features in Mac OS X “Leopard” which some people were not all that impressed with, but with the overall census that it’s a great operating system. Sparks began to fly when people started comparing it with Windows Vista, not just because it was natural to compare similar products, but since Apple has mocked so much of it in the past, it’s probably fair to reverse the equation. For the sake of neutrality, I’m not going to say any operating system is better than the other. They’re just different.

One of the big arguments was the “new desktop” feature in Leopard, demoed as feature number one by Steve Jobs, is very much like the Vista desktop. In essence, the desktop of Leopard has been updated with a translucent menu bar, a new dock and more focus on the wallpaper. Let’s not judge if these are for better or worse, but why. The answer is, “I don’t know”. Strange, but true. I don’t have any contacts with Apple and certainly not with the Apple Design Team. In fact, it would be true to say that 99% of the people ‘arguing’ don’t know either. They speculate, but that’s not the same as knowing the exact process behind the decision. (Which given Apple’s tendency to keep things very tight, most likely won’t surface for the next millennium.)

But, on the other hand, after chatting with Tjeerd Hoek, ex-director on the Vista design team, I do know why Microsoft made the decisions it did with the Vista desktop. For example, nature, and specifically grass, were inevitable for every default wallpaper that shipped with the Longhorn/Vista betas. Why was this? Tjeerd says it was to enhance the perception of Glass. Aero Glass that is. “To make Glass really visible, and especially our fancy and costly Gaussian blur and frosting, it is important to see a delta visually on the edges where the Glass surface ends. Thus you want a background with clear, visible lines.”

If you think about it, there are unlimited choices, and an important choice. Tjeerd explains, “Now, obviously wallpaper isn’t exactly a key functional feature, but it is one image you choose very carefully and it ends up all over the place of course as a central player: it still is the face of your product in many ways, even just in sheer pixel count/size.”

So now you’re saying to yourself, “Good for them. But what does this have to do with Leopard and WW3?” What it means is that Microsoft had very specific, practical reasons to select the type of wallpapers they used for the interface they had developed. Translucency being the common factor, it could be highly, if not definitely, possible Apple arrived at the same practical reasons to make the choices they have with their interface.

Ants vs termites. Did ant sue termites for violating animal patents?

People often attack each other or other companies for copying designs and other artistic concepts, with the ideology that they somehow ‘own’ an abstract expression (Just like Cadbury wants to own the color purple), but science would prove that this is not true. Natural selection proves to us in nature at least good ideas become the norm. For example, predatory/prey patterns in the animal kingdom not only compared from the past but across different animal kingdoms show very clear similarities. Isolated, unique evolutionary paths can, and often do, converge. If you take Apple’s and Microsoft’s design studios as two isolated evolutions, there’s no reason why they can’t converge on similar ideas. It would almost make sense if they did.

So why do we still ‘fight’ if it’s evolutionarily normal, if not encouraged, to ‘copy’ ideas? The blame might be on the marketeers. Apple’s marketing team throughout the decades have done such a good job at disassociating itself from its competitors, that Apple as a brand has become separated from the rest of the industry, when in fact it’s not all that unique. If you don’t look at the value, which is created by marketing, Macs are computers. Most of them use the same components as “PCs” and they still function like computers. People were told to “think different” and so they did. And now we’ve reached the bottom: insulting each other.

I know all of the above won’t float everyone’s boat, especially those boats with a hole at the bottom, but I just want to highlight some of the reasons why I think we’re not that different, but have become the arrogant and ignorant users that we are. Apple’s moving forward, Microsoft’s moving forward, the world is a better place. “Macs vs PCs” started as a marketing campaign, but has become very real. Real ugly that is. Can’t we just be nice and get along infesting the world like ants and termites?

On top her (Mary Jo) severe ineptitude at even pretending to know enough about the computing industry to form an objective opinion, she can’t write any better than I can (as can be seen on her blog Microsoft Watch—but I’m just a blogger on the intertubes. She must have sucked an inordinate load of dick to get her position at ZDNet.

Whether you agree or disagree with anything he says previously, he did not have to go there to make a point. He could have won me over, but once you go as low as that, you lose me completely.

Fanboys, any side, as loud as they are, are becoming moral slugs of society. They know no boundaries, and go to war over what? Why the hell do you need to insult someone to make a point? Don’t you have any logical arguments? Stop throwing rocks from the covers of anonymity and try to act like there is some human decency in you.

Update: Somehow, human decency doesn’t appear to apply to “Edd’s generation”. As he writes, “The immaturity is simply a bonus to my generation, and was obviously not very well received by you. Sorry about that. :]”. I’m his generation, and I certainly disapprove.

Post navigation

50 insightful thoughts

I agree with Mary, and I’ve been reading her stuff for years. But when I read her article I though “My god, you’ve unleashed all of the demons from hell!”
Hopefully this article wont see you in the same boat…

As I like to say, “keep your useless words inside your mouth.” Trolling and bashing should end for good. I recall having read a saying that goes along like this: “when you speak, make sure your words are better than your silence.” I see more people should have read — and understood — that, too. Sigh.

Yes, it is really ugly because the discussion (= war) isn’t about the features or improvements. My concern with Leopard is not the grass wallpaper, but that they do not really improve things but only put some (nice) features on top. So what about meta data in Finder, or fast sorting of files? Why Apple didn’t improved the dock bar? Didn’t they listen to their own usability consultants? (Bruce Tognazzini anyone?)

Long-
You took the words right out of my mouth. I read MJF’s blog daily and to see the pages of insults was disappointing and downright disturbing. On the other hand, I watched the WWDC announcements too and I wasn’t overly impressed either. I was expecting a lot more after Jobs touted those ‘Top Secret’ features. Nonetheless I do think Leopard is much more polished than its predecessor and who knows–maybe this is a scheme by Apple to keep OS X on equal footing with Vista and give consumers something different but also familiar. I have great respect for Steve Jobs and Apple and would really love to know their thought processes for this release.

First – let me start by saying that I have a Mac, I love OS X but I also have several PCs all running Windows and love it too, equally. These days I predominantly use Windows whilst my Mac is currently my HTPC.

I used to respect Mary Jo Foley. Right up until this article.

Why? Because to me, it looks like she didn’t bother to even do any research – she went in and then essentially accused Apple for copying features from Microsoft when clearly OS X has had some of the features for longer than Windows and 10.5 just expands upon them.

If she wrote it in a sarcastic manner just to take stabs at Apple then she should have known full well to expect this. Apple fan boys (and MS ones, along with Linux and every other flavour of fan boys) will always go to these immature lengths.

On the otherhand, like I said previously, if she’s serious, she should have done some more extensive research than rely on what thought. She, however, does not deserve the treatment she’s been given.

Personally though I wouldn’t hold it against all Apple fan boys – not all behave this way, most are quite civil. I’d say it is the immaturity of the Digg community which inflamed the whole situation.

1) in my opinion OSX Tiger already manages to hide OS complexities behind a simple interface more than any other OS. Then if you need to drill down to get to the source of problems it’s already pretty straight forward and quick.

2) Microsoft obviously tried to do the same with Vista but in my opinion failed somewhat. Many features are in my book too convoluted for the average users and too obscure for the power user. To proof my point compare Wireless networking in OSX vs. WinXP vs. Vista. OSX wins hands down followed by WinXP… I still don’t get the Vista version of networking… maybe it’s just me.

3) the biggest sore point in OSX for me has always been the Finder. Windows Explorer I always through was much better in this respect… again, I didn’t like what they did with Explorer in Vista… I am only hoping that the “new Finder” in OSX Leopard will be better.

4) MS copying from Apple… I think it’s a long stretch to say Apple tried to make OSX look like Vista. I can see why people say so but if you do a feature by feature comparison you will find that most features Microsoft sold us as revolutionary where already there in OSX Tiger… in some cases almost in an identical way…

… what’s the point of my post? My point is that both systems have their strengths and weaknesses. What’s more important to me is how fast I get my work done… the sad fact is that to really get my work done fast I have to use both a Mac and a PC.

I can’t understand why people must vehemently defend companies such as Microsoft and Apple. These are businesses that are there to make money by selling products to consumers. Why do companies do this? To make money for their shareholders. So who comes first? Shareholders not consumers.

But in the end all of this is meaningless, there is so much more to life. If only people would put as much effort into saving our future as they do defending companies who don’t give as much back to you.

okay… I actually took the time to read the article in question. My only comment would be this lady has obviously never worked with a Mac OSX machine… so much miss-information it’s not funny.

1) 64bit ness… OSX Leopard will run on both 64bit and 32bit machines… rather than having to buy two different versions it will do necessary adjustments automatically under the hood.

2) New Leopard desktop looks like Vista… Sidebar and Aero. ts. You mean sidebar looks like gadgets which was in OSX when Vista was still called Longhorn. In my memory this was implemented first in Konfabulator which Yahoo oh so gloriously killed.

3) QuickLook aka Life previews… guess what, this is already in some ways implemented in OSX Tiger.

4) Flip3d being the same as cover flow? huh… Wasn’t that first in iTunes? Mainly eye anyways…

5) Core animation… same as Microsoft Max photo-sharing… come-on lady. The Microsoft equivalent is called WPF/ Direct X. It’s a technology not a product.

6) Boot Camp… Solitaire remark… heard of sarcasm

7) iChat… yes it is similar to Meeting Spaces but the additional features such as automatic keying, image, document and movie sharing make it a killer product for the creative industry.

So this lady has covered the industry for 20 years… it this was Journalism has come too? Thank god for people like Walt Mossberg. Mary Jo should do her homework first before making such uninformed comments.

While I don’t agree in abusing her as far as Journalistic merit goes I would give this one an F minus… as in failed miserably.

one last thing… I don’t know why people keep hammering on about Glass. Semi transparent windows are in my opinion the single most pointless feature in any OS. Can please someone explain to me how this is making me more productive… please remember we are talking a computers aka a tool here (not a toy).

In a sense i am starting to think that the fanboys of Apple and Windows are a lot like football hooligans. They are both fiercely loyal to their respective brands, and are willing to go far in order to display that loyalty, or patriotism rather. I think what really fuels this is the refusal to let the “other guy” have his point proven right, in this case which OS is better – The Mac guys are convinced its their system, and on the flip side of that coin, so does the Windows guys. Added to this is ofcourse the whole “who stole and improved/changed/altered what” arguing. I personally don’t understand how copying and improving a well working concept which adds to functionality or the experience of a product should lead to a death sentence. To me it would be like Mac invented the wheel, and accused everyone else who might have come to the same conclusion of being an unimaginative copycat.

As for the people who are complaining about the visual extras such as Aero Glass and Flip 3D – don’t use them! Use the classic theme instead. When i am using my PC for anything other than work i want it to be an enjoyable experience, and i want it to be pleasing to the senses: sound, appearance etc. To me that is just as important as function in this case.

>Please people, this is NOT an argument about which operating system is better

Nothing could make the point of your post more than the fact that some people can’t actually adddress the fanboi issue and instead fall back to the tired who copied who this is better than that arguments. Hilarious(ly sad).

@Jim: Microsoft (and any other company for that matter) only takes the high road when they can afford to. Check out another of their divisions – the XBOX one – they haven’t had any problems taking cheap shots at Nintendo in their fight for the gaming console market. Apple is an underdog in this particular business, and thus takes up that position in their marketing. It’s a great selling point because people get emotional about it and pick a side.

As for “as of lately” – obviously you’ve never seen earlier Apple ads; They’ve ALWAYS been doing this – it’s how they brand themselves in the business.

If I were a marketing employee at Apple or Microsoft, I’d be clapping my clammy little hands right about now, reading these comments. Half of you have fallen right into their schemes, and have gotten overly emotional about pieces of software. And that sells.

I think her blogs been great, and I read it all the time. I also agree 100% with Long. Lay off personal insults you immature @#$%’s

To tom:
“Flip3d being the same as cover flow? huh… Wasn’t that first in iTunes? Mainly eye anyways…”
Thing is, they don’t even serve the same purpose! Guys hello, Cover flow is for previewing files. Flip 3D is for flipping through active windows. Also Flip 3d was shown off in the old longhorn builds before the reset. That was way before Coverflow in items. But that’s irrelevant since as I said there not the same thing.

“Core animation… same as Microsoft Max photo-sharing… come-on lady. The Microsoft equivalent is called WPF/ Direct X. It’s a technology not a product.”
This was one of the main key points which hinted to me that she did either very little to no research when talking about this. I mean come on! CoreAnimation is Macs version of WPF aka Avalon. As Tom said, it’s a technology not a product!

It sad to see that nothing is new .. there was nothing new in the first keynote .. and there is nothing new in this one .. I have never been impressed by Mac OS .. and it’s not that one that will.

I don’t understand their needs of transparency .. Mac OS X was the best looking OS for many users .. and I find Leopard ugly compared to Tiger. Is it just marketing ?

The difference between XP and Vista is not about transparency .. it is about a look .. a way to show what people thinks that is not possible with Windows .. there is many things more than the transparency .. it’s the whole system that interacts with this transparency ..

But what about Mac OS X Leopard ? I don’t think it is something other than marketing.

I don’t want to take part into the fight that is arising .. but I clearly DON’T understand the choice they have taken for the Mac OS X Leopard ..

@CoLD-FiRe: As a mactard, and one who does – from time to time – read up on Apple’s stuff, the thing that annoyed me with her article was that she had several facts that were plain incorrect, and she was making points out of them. Someone as prominent as her really should do a better job at getting her facts straight before she tries to argue from them. And she apparently still hasn’t gotten them straight because she manages to completely overlook them in her ‘apology’ post.

Having said that, there’s a Long (ha!) way from that and to the kind of comments she has been getting.

This was a very well thought out review of the situation. I don’t think it is just limited to Apple vs MS arguments, as the general decorum in our Web 2.x anonymous online society has degraded. Or, I should say that these feelings were once confined to small groups of individuals where others could not see in. Now, all of the small groups have become larger and have become more known to the general public. This causes what we see here. It isn’t any different than fanboys arguing about Ford vs Chevy, Republican vs Democrat, Pepsi vs Coke, Yankees vs Mets and so on.

What this leads to is that one groups thoughts are now publicly available. The fanboys from the other side can see these thoughts, and therefore feel compelled to comment due to the inaccuracies that are presented. And the war starts.

Regardless of what she got wrong in her article, the point was not to compare Vista and Leopard. She was merely posing the question, “What’s so revolutionary in Leopard?”

I’m looking at the list of the top 10 features in Leopard Jobs showed and I see nothing revolutionary. I’m also not a mac person. System 7 was the last Mac OS I used before I made the switch to PC long ago. Thus, I’m also not “in” with the whole Mac craze so I, too, would like to know what’s so revolutionary about OS X Leopard.

Because Leopard looks so similar to Vista today, it’s hard to tell just how different Leopard is compared to it’s predecessor.

[…]Apple’s marketing team throughout the decades have done such a good job at disassociating itself from its competitors, that Apple as a brand has become separated from the rest of the industry, when in fact it’s not all that unique. If you don’t look at the value, which is created by marketing, Macs are computers. Most of them use the same components as “PCs” and they still function like computers. People were told to “think different” and so they did. And now we’ve reached the bottom: insulting each other[…]

The point is, Apple was different and MS copied Apple. Apple continued to be different, and MS continued to copy Apple. Fast forward from 1984 to 2007 and not much has changed. MS continues to copy Apple. The fact that Vista and OS X aren’t unique any longer has more to do with MS following suit with Apple.

And by the way, for years and years, the hardware in Macs were far superior to anything that commodity PC’s had. From the use of integrated SCSI controllers and different buses, Apple did not use typical PC hardware. Sure, if you break it down to PCB, solder, capacitor, resistor….yeah, they’re all the same. Go back through time and you’d be hard pressed to find regularly stocked and sold home PC’s equipped with SCSI controllers and the like. The integral designs of the chipsets are different.

To comment about Mac originating the wheel and then being upset that others copy and improve upon the wheel… Hmm, I believe it’s more like Mac originates the wheel, MS takes the wheel, improves upon it, claims it as their own, then charges licensing fees for anyone that wants to use wheels now and forever more.

[…]But Microsoft’s support of Mono is simply the same old same old for the software giant, IDC analyst Dan Kusnetzky said. Microsoft has historically achieved market dominance by controlling APIs, and forcing competitors to write software to its APIs, only to turn around and change those same APIs. “Instead of satisfying their own customers’ demand, competitors are busy catching up with Microsoft,” Kusnetzky said. “It looks like they’ve gotten someone in the open source community to play the game of following Microsoft around and trying to do what they do.”[…]

MS is notoriously good at NOT innovating. From taking unix code and putting it into Windows NT (yes, MS had to shell out $150 Million to Digital Equipment for including VMS code), from taking IBM’s original disk operating system and calling it MS-DOS and then driving a wedge between IBM and MS, to taking OS/2, forking off that code and developing Windows 95 – and not even executing it as well (Win 95 didn’t have true multitasking, nor true 32 Bit support – OS/2 did).

In terms of desktops, graphics, GUI’s… Xerox PARC is where the GUI started. This is back in the day before 1984’s revolutionary MacIntosh or Windows 3.0. Try the 1970’s. And a true release in 1981 with Xerox Star – where the whole concept of Windows, Icons, Menus, and Pointers originated (WIMP).

Let’s see, whatother grand technologies has MS contributed and claimed as their own? RDP… W-Windows came out in 1983, followed thereafter by X-Windows – a network transparent GUI desktop/window management environment. Run your applications remote? You betcha.

My point whole point is, you say we all end up looking the same anyhow…or something to that effect. Sure, that is great and all, but what about recognizing your predecessor and giving credit where credit is due? Apple has been a lot more forthcoming then MS about where it’s code comes from (Mac OS X – from NeXT Mach Kernel, which itself comes from Carnegie Mellon, which itself comes from BSD, which itself comes from 1970’s UC Berkley).

Does MS openly divulge that their TCP/IP stack started with Unix source code? How many of you readers new about the $150 Million MS had to pay to Digital Equipment for infringing upon their VMS code?

Finally, for the curious and not so curious, Linux is actually based on Minix…not Unix. It is a Unix’ish O/S. A Unix clone. Not Unix.

I think the fanboyism was minimal until those “I’m a Mac” commercials surfaced. If anything, the PC zealots used to treat Mac like a little fly that was easily swatted, but with the oversimplified and consistently blatantly untrue claims stated in their latest marketing campaign Apple has taken the offensive, thus the PC zealots are on the defensive.

This is very much akin to the Sega vs. Nintendo battles of yore. They were both great platforms but Sega decided to pick a fight with inflammatory ads and all of a sudden a line was drawn in the sand between platform supporters. No such ads surfaced in the Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft competition and thus the fanboys were largely supportive of their favourite platform without subjecting to insults.

I honestly believe that this childish Mac ad campaign is to blame for all the hostility these days. These ads are phrased in such a way that they make Mac appear as the lesser of two evils instead of the better of two champions, and that’s just generates bad blood between 2 sets of consumers with the exact same goals.

Mary Jo will have a couple of weeks of ignorant comments to contend with, but it’ll all blow over after that.

Disgusting, that guy really didn’t have to go there. Its just software, lets stop acting like its the cure for HIV/AIDs and Cancer. Over the years there has been a convergence between Windows and Mac OS, come on, both of them were inspired by the XEROX Parc Project of the mid 70’s when the GUI was at an experimental period. Personally, I don’t see any major resemblance between Leopard and Vista except for the translucent Global Menu Bar. If Leopard resembles anything its SUN’s Project Looking Glass which I clearly pointed out on my blog.

Over the years I think folks from Apple have worked at Microsoft on their design teams, so some form of cross pollination occurs. But then again its really a combination of what consumers want and a logical progression in the industry such as taking advantage of the powerful GPU’s out there to help render the UI, something Apple realized from early on with OS X’s initial release in 2001 a couple years before Microsoft demoed the idea with an early Longhorn build at WinHEC ’03.

Long, that Director based Longhorn screenshot which I first saw on Thurrotts website, the grass wall paper was actually taken by Hillel just for that PDC ’03 demo. That would be like light years before Apple ever thought about using a Grass themed wallpaper for Leopard. Also, the Grass paper in your inset in the Vista RTM code is actually not one of the default wall papers available in the OOBE. If you let Vista select your wallpaper during OOBE it selects the new Bliss which is the Mountain with the river.

So, in the end, they are both alike, the utilize the same hardware and have similar technologies: Visual Studio vs. XCODE | WPF vs Core Audio, Video, Animation, Graphics.

The way I see it, if OS X and Windows didn’t both exist then the one that did would suck. You need some inspiration to change things. I would like to see OS X grow in market share so as to be taken more seriously as a competitor, thereby pushing the innovations and improving _both_ products.

1) There is no real innovation in OS development today.
I agree with LH: It would appear that most of what both Apple and Microsoft are selling as oh so revolutionary upgrades to their respective OS are nothing more than fine tuned versions of their previous incarnations. The only real compelling reason to upgrade is because your new computer will have it pre-installed… Cred to Apple for “only” charging US$129 for the upgrade… I’ll be sticking with XP for the time being (already have Vista purchased but only installed on a test machine) just don’t need any of that new eye candy to get my work done.

2) Technology journalism by enlarge is mediocre these days.
Looks like most journalists these days don’t base their comments on well informed facts but rather clueless ramblings. Any they wonder why blogging is killing their profession? Should they be abused for doing a bad job? Probably not… pointed out or even better ignored? Absolutely!!!

Even though i am a keen supporter with Microsoft products, I’ve never actually seen the whole point betweent he PC vs Mac wars. I think both products do a great job at what they were designed for.
I equally love Apple products, their hardware as well as their software, but when both sides of the community argue against who’s better, it gets silly. I remember with last year’s WWDC, the witty banners they had “Redmond, start your photocopiers”, witty, funny, but not necessary.

Who copied who in Apple/Mac and Windows/PC is not an issue. Both are merely copying things developed years ago under UNIX and UNIX-like operating systems running X Windows. Both, to me, look like variations on the Enlightenment Window manager with a lot of bits from GNUstep.

For a PC, you can install any BSD variant. For a Mac, drop Aqua and install an X11 server and a decent, contemporary window manager. OSX is already a BSD variant.

“The way I see it, if OS X and Windows didn’t both exist then the one that did would suck.”

@Christopher Hawkins

I wouldn’t go as far to say that they would suck, but there would certainly be less motivation for innovation, and in that respect I completely agree with you.

On another subject, it’s sad how “fanboys” have turned out; resulting in flaming in forums everywhere. I prefer Apple’s OSX for its stability, but as-is its compatibility is poor. I prefer Windows for its compatibility and ease of installation of new software, but its stability is poor. I prefer Linux for its ease-of-use, but not for its ease-of-installation (which unless you are dealing with Debian packages is non-existant).

As Tom stated, a computer is a tool and not a toy; that doesn’t, however, mean it should be a chore to operate. And in agreement with him, it’s funny how people resort to 2 or 3 OSs to do their work. It’s a shame that through all of this arguing, the programmers and development teams are not addressing this problem.

And finally, as Jonathan quite rightly said, fanboys should be subjected to a year of their least favourite OS. I hated Linux, but grew to like it. I sometimes liked and sometimes despised Windows, and now I can tolerate it.

At the end of the day, what most end users want is a plug and play personal computer. you switch it on and do what you have to do. with a Mac you can, with a PC you cant.
end of it. I used PC’s for over 15 years until 2005 when i had enough of getting blue screens, drivers updates for this or that, DLL missing or corrupted for whatever reasons, security update for this or that, virus infiltration unless you got 10 anti-virus installed constantly scanning while you browse the net, anti-virus update for this or that.. and so on and so on… in the end i was spending more time fixing and maintening the OS than actually been productive. 2005 I threw the PC out of the window and cashed on a Powermac. I will never go back to PC again. Unless you spend you time coding don’t bother with a PC. Get a Mac and start using your time for doing the things you really want with an OS.